I'll have to agree with most here , though I disagree about conflict towns not meaning anything. Taking a conflict town is great if you are in a particular faction and were hoping for a "safe" zone within the PvP area.  You can get guards, merchants, etc. in the conflict town that can help turn the tide of a longstanding battle in the PvP zones.  

The only problem I really have is the tremendous amount of turnaround on the conflict towns... no it shouldn't happen within 2 or 3 hours.. but a few days of continuous questing to turn a town with a raid full of people makes it very tough to stay diligent.  I see the purpose and the advantages to it, but after being in a few raids to take a number of towns, it gets monotonous without opposing factions in the area.

Other than that, theres plenty to do apart from PvP, though PvP is one of the most gratifying... especially when at war with opposing clans.  Theres tons of stuff to explore, theres gambling to be had, theres tons of items to craft, AP hunting, recipe hunting, rare monsters to find and kill, races to enter, events to join.

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by Xondar123

Originally posted by SaintViktor

I wish that was the release date but until EA/Bioware/Lucas Arts announce it then its speculation. I'm all for it being on the console because the future of mmos will be on the console.

 

That's a pretty hilarious, and wildly inaccurate, prediction.

 

its extremely unlikely that the future of mmo's is the console, mostly because mmo's evolve, and consoles don't once a title is released on a console, its limited forever to that particular consoles limitations, with pc's that isnt the case, as they are also evolving, take Eve for example, the game is far different, far more advanced now than it was when it was originally released, for a console it would mean that the game would have evolved beyond the capacities of the console to actually run it.. consoles are essentially dead ends, by the time they are released, the level of technology has already bypassed them, only PC's currently have the ability to make use of technology as it happens, already, the ps3 and the xbox 360 are far less capable than even a mid range PC, and compared to a high end PC there really is no comparison, even now we're starting to see 6 core processors (the intel one has 12 virtual processors ffs...) until there is a way to upgrade consoles to keep 'current' then they will only, be really suited to single player, and multiplayer games, they dont really have the technology to be anything else.

You are mistaken, sir, by this thought process you would have to believe that every computer would be upgraded along with the game.  Scaling a game for use by a console is absolutely possible... with additional content and even additional textures, it does not automatically make the game unplayable on a console.  Console games have a single hardware spec, so you know exactly what kind of hardware and software a user will be playing the game on.

When a game is developed for a console there are no variables like the kind of graphics card, or what operating system the user will be playing on.  There are no minimum or recommended specs when you create a game for a console, because the game is optimized for use on that system.  In the next generation of consoles, I could stand to reason that you will see an increasing number of console MMOs launching, and in the end, its safe to say we will see simultaneous launches of most games on console and PC by triple A developers. That is a safe assumption given there have been 4 new console MMOs scheduled for release in the next year on the CURRENT hardware platforms. The next gen systems will most probably be based with this type of gaming in mind.

Originally posted by Vagrant_Zero

 

---

Originally posted by ryman
I hope you PC hard-ons recognize that Stars Wars: Knights of the Old Republic was originally on the Xbox before the PC release.

---

 

This part about KotOR being a console game isn't even remotely accurate.

KotOR was ORIGINALLY a PC only title (the Aurora Engine that powered KotOR was the Neverwinter Nights engine, a PC exclusive title). The Xbox version of the game wasn't announced until months after the PC announcement. During that original announcement Bioware mentioned their plan was to release both versions simultaneously.

So why didn't it go down like that?

Scuttlebutt says KotOR was repurposed by Microsoft to be a timed exclusive for the Xbox. In other words they paid Bioware lots of cash to sit on the PC edition for 6 months, just like they paid Bioware lots of cash to keep the Mass Effect series off the PS3, even though the Unreal3 engine the game is powered by is a multisystem engine.

Bioware became the company it is today because of their PC fans, not their console fans. That is a fact Bioware is very much aware of.

Though console sales of all BioWare games that were simultaneously released have always outmatched the PC sales, but thats neither here nor there.  This ridiculous PC vs Console feud is so stupid.  That isn't the point of the thread, whether it *could* release on consoles isn't really an issue, if they wanted to develop it for consoles, then it wouldn't be an issue... the fact is, they said it wouldn't be released on consoles at launch, and is a working PC-Only title at this point.

 I'll be interested to see how the game pans out.  The FFA style could be appealing, if the circumstances for punishment were high enough and discouraged it in a way that PKing was a niche crowd instead of a majority.. which is rarely the case in games such as these.

My only true concern is Permadeath... as thats the last thing I'd want to see implemented. Sure some people love it... but it seems to be more of a deterrent than most other mechanics I've seen.  

Originally posted by Hyanmen

Originally posted by Selenica

It's like with World of Warcraft. They want it to be as accessible to as many players with PCs as possible. Or they could just release a console version, as the Xbox 360 & PS3 are both more advanced than the average computer. Especially the younger gamers Bioware appears to be trying to appeal to with SWTOR - most whom probably don't even know the difference between an integrated and a dedicated GPU. They probably all have atleast one next-gen console though.. 

Yep, and WoW gets away with it because it's a PC only title. But if TOR will be released on consoles... I don't see a reason not to take full advantage of the cheap yet powerful technology. 

I agree, though BioWare stated specifically this game would not be on consoles on Launch, and that it is being developed for the PC, though they have looked into  the console market.  They have not confirmed that this will ever be a console release, and the only thing we know for sure, is that on launch, we will NOT be seeing a console release.

The speculation is extremely rash on the part of this retailer if they are taking preorders for a game that will not see a console release in the next year or two, if they see one at all.

I still feel that a console release is possible, though not plausible at this stage... I would like to see one though.

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by maskedweasel

Originally posted by sacredfool

It's on the internet. It must be true. 

 

A lot of the information we gather for MMOs comes from the internet! ;)

 

Question is, how much fate do you have in a website that shows a 24 oktober 2010 release date for a game that will be released in spring 2011...

No faith in the release date at all. I have no faith that it will launch on consoles either.  I didn't even know it was being developed for consoles.  The real question would be, why it was posted in the first place.  Did they inform retailers of a possible release?  Did this company just make it up?  

Its kind of like reading an interview where they say they will not, or have not, decided if a vehicle will be in the game yet, and then you see on another site a picture of the vehicle graphically rendered...   I'm not saying it will release on consoles or anything, I just found the link to be worth mentioning.  I don't know how many other sites have this game listed for the 360. This is most possibly a fluke.... but a strange one.

Originally posted by sacredfool

It's on the internet. It must be true. 

A lot of the information we gather for MMOs comes from the internet! ;)

Originally posted by Kabaal

Considering there's not even a release date for the PC yet why on earth would you believe a console release date on some random site? There is nothing to discuss, unless you plan on discussing someones guess.

I didn't say specifically that I believe it, I just found this link to be of interest, and I posted it.  A retailers "guess" on a retail date for a platform that hasn't been confirmed the game will release on is kind of interesting.  There must be some reason they posted it, whether it is misinformation, or something else entirely.

The release date is obviously off anyways... still interesting.

 The Developers said "Not on launch" but one site shows a release date

shop.gameplay.co.uk/webstore/productpage.asp

Discuss

Originally posted by Xondar123

Originally posted by Bannne

Originally posted by dandmcd

In the Darth Hater chat tonight, those who had a chance to play it reassured us about just about every worry one might have.  They said the combat was fast and snappy.  Many lighting and smoke effects looked impressive to them.   The game world appeared to be very open, and they believed they could walk a very long ways without hitting any kind of barrier.  Also, the world map showed multiple zones they could go into on the same planet, and this was supposed to be one of the smallest planets in the game, so they were literally shocked when they found that out, because they thought the tested zone was huge.  The DarthHater girls and boys are big fans of Bioware, but I could tell by the sound of their voice they were absolutely thrilled with the game, and thought it was immeaditetly engaging and fun, and felt immersive.

Key words "the world APPEARED to be open, and they BELIEVED they could walk a long way without hitting barriers" so really it's just speculation,not fact.

AOC has open zones where i can walk around but it's still a loading instance game. As of now no one who has played  the game can say if it's an open world,meaning no barriers and not forced loading to get to one region or another. As of now all we have had is one playable race which i think think it is only human with companions making up the other playable races,i guess Bioware think controlling a pet is playable.

So you see we have not seen anything new with this latest showing,just another class running around doing some quests.

 

 

So your speculation that the world is small and instanced is more valid than their speculations? I'm going to have to trust them over you. Mainly because, you know, they've actually played the game.

QFT

I like you today.

Originally posted by Gameloading

I'm surprised so many people think this game can get to two million subscribers.Outside of World of Warcraft, not a single traditional western MMORPG has ever made it to 1 million subscribers. The largest one was Everquest, which was around 500k subscribers at its peak.

Why would SW:TOR hit 2 million subscribers? Its competing with World of Warcraft which shows no sign of dropping anytime soon. It also going to compete with new games such as Final Fantasy XIV.

There is nothing stopping TOR from being able to hit the 2 million subscribers mark.  Many BioWare games hit that mark on PC only.  I think this is why a lot of hype is heading around the story aspect of TOR early on, as they're trying to bring awareness to non-MMO players as well.

I would say a safe bet would be that BioWare would keep 1/3rd of its launch subscription base.  If the sales were on par with other BioWare game sales, then it is possible for them to break even at a base of 1 million subscribers.

We have no way of knowing at this time how this game will turn out, but if you could go back in time to the launch of WoW I don't think anyone said "Hey, this game will make 6M subs easy".  If they had, we would be hearing all the same arguments.

Originally posted by jimbobz

Originally posted by maskedweasel

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by sinjin

Easy, they will have 1 million forsure in the first month and 2 million in  a matter of months.

and in the 3rd month, 500K and sinking like a stone due to player dissatisfaction with the content.

Sure, it might not happen, but other than WOW and a few others this has been the pattern the past 5 years and hoping for better isn't the way to bet.

It could happen.....but you never know.

 

 

I think if any game has a chance to retain subscribers, this game will be it, if nothing else then for the story aspect.  Seeing a drop in subscribers is a current trend though. I can't say how the majority of players will play this game, but I know I'll be subscribed for the first couple months at least.

 

You people are just like a broken record, keep saying the same thing about all games.  When this dont reach thiose numbers, it will be lest see what else we can move onto to make ourselves feel happy.

I don't know exactly what you're getting at here.  You don't know what the future holds for TOR.  The only person I can speak for is myself.  I expressed an opinion, and what I felt, deal with it.

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by sinjin

Easy, they will have 1 million forsure in the first month and 2 million in  a matter of months.

and in the 3rd month, 500K and sinking like a stone due to player dissatisfaction with the content.

Sure, it might not happen, but other than WOW and a few others this has been the pattern the past 5 years and hoping for better isn't the way to bet.

It could happen.....but you never know.

 

I think if any game has a chance to retain subscribers, this game will be it, if nothing else then for the story aspect.  Seeing a drop in subscribers is a current trend though. I can't say how the majority of players will play this game, but I know I'll be subscribed for the first couple months at least.

Originally posted by Toquio3

Expectations are always dangerous. I just hope EA wont can this if it doesnt meet that quota. But I doubt it will, after all its not just EA, its LucasArts. And if they kept SWG alive until now, theres no way they would let TOR be shut down, no matter how bad it would get.

I'd have to agree. I'm a fan of the development team and the direction this game is going, but if it didn't do well, I think EA would be more likely to throw more money at it than shut it down.

Originally posted by Xondar123

Originally posted by green13

I picked up one of the mmorpg.com free keys and gave FE a go.

It was a bit better than I was expecting. It has an excellent crafting system. The game is easy to get into and play. Gameplay is generally fun. But they've done a few odd things that seriously detract from what otherwise might have been excellent game.

The Good

Crafting. FE has one of the best crafting systems I've seen in any mmo. It's different from any other crafting system I've seen. That in itself gives it some novelty value. But it also works really well.

While a little more complicated than the average mmo, it has a good learning curve. There's a short introductory tutorial area then you're thrown into the actual gameworld. But there are a series of quests which continue to gradually introduce you to every aspect of the game. These quests span several towns and could take an average player over a week to complete. There are a lot of them but it doesn't feel even remotely like you're in a tutorial area. Doing all of these quests will also earn you a lot of free skill books.

FPS. Much (but not all) of FE's combat is FPS. It's a personal taste thing but there aren't many FPS mmos on the market and I think that's a shame.

The Bad

Not all of FE's combat is FPS. Mutations, for example, follow the old-school EQ style of gameplay, i.e. players click on a target with their mouse to select it, then activate an ability/mutation. It's one of several odd divisions in the game.

The faction system - which FE's developers claim adds depth to the game - is incredibly shallow. If you play the game for any decent amount of time you will hear the term "spin the wheel". This refers to players hopping around each of the six factions.

In FE's advancement system players earn APs (action points) as they earn experience. Players earn 20 AP per level. Some quests also award bonus APs. Most of these bonus AP missions are in neutral towns but some of them are in faction towns. So to get all of the APs in the game, you need to work your way around the faction wheel. Keeping in mind that FE's "end-game" is pvp-centric, every single AP counts.

Mutations are also taught by different factions. So if you want to collect them all you need to work your way around the faction wheel.

Certain crafting knowledges (i.e. recipes) are faction specific. If you want them all, you need to work your way around the faction wheel.

Adding conflict towns (capturable pvp towns) into this mix makes it even more shallow. Some AP and crafting recipe missions are only available in conflict towns. So to get all of this content you have to visit each town as it is owned by each of the 6 factions (at any given time you can only be friendly to 3). That could take you a long time.

The end result is that many players will end up spending an enormous amount of time not playing in the faction they actually want to be in.

Grinding faction points (i.e. to change your faction and "spin the wheel") can be done reasonably quickly in a big enough team so this aspect isn't a huge time-sink. But overall factions add no depth to the game. The faction APs and mutations (and to a lesser extent recipes)  turn what otherwise might have been an interesting faction system into a meaningless grind.

The Ugly

Once you spend APs on skill points or statistics there's no way to get them back. This is a problem. The amount of information about skills and mutations varies. Some abilities have detailed and comprehensive descriptions in their respective in-game skill books which you can view in shops. Some don't. This is especially true for cooldowns. For some abilities/mutations you only get that information once you've spent irretrievable APs to learn them. Information available online is also quite sketchy.

Mutations are a bit lame. The defensive and healing mutations are decent. The shield mutations are a viable alternative to investing heavily in the armour skill and the healing mutations are generally better than the first-aid skill (mutation heals have longer range and don't require a bandage component). But offensive mutations are strange. While they can do a reasonable amount of damage there's only a few with cooldowns under 30 seconds. For value for skill points, investing in weapon skills is definitely the better option. The mutation DoTs are quite nice but with 15 second durations and 30 second cooldowns they're usually only worth using on boss mobs.

Mutations also only have relatively short ranges. The range for two of the direct damage mutations is 20m and for DoTs and the third direct damage it's 10m. The range on pistols and rifles varies from roughly 20m to 70m. A rifle user actually has a serious defence debuff against melee attacks - getting within 10m of your target while wielding a rifle is generally not a good idea. So these mutations are definitely more suited to melee.

But in PvP rifles and pistols have the upper hand.

Offensive mutations are probably restricted with such long cooldowns and short ranges because they aren't FPS. If like rifles and pistols mutations had longer ranges and could be fired off at will then they would have an unfair advantage. FPS rifles and pistols can miss a target. Point-click-select-activate mutations can't.

But why the offensive mutations aren't FPS is a complete mystery.

________

 

While close to being an excellent game, FE has committed that cardinal sin of trying to be too many things at once. It's almost like they've separately designed several different games - each individually very good - and then tried to mash them together. The result is less than the sum of its parts.

It's fun enough that I'd recommend it. Even if you only played it single-player for a month or so I think you'd get value for money. But I'm not sure how much long-term potential it has in its current form.

 

I don't understand you criticisms of factions. They are shallow? As opposed to what exactly? WoW where you chose a faction when you make a character and are stuck with it for the life of your character?

I also don't think you understand what "spinning the wheel" entails. It isn't like you get up one day and say "today I wanna be CHOTA!" and then get up the next day and say "today I wanna be Enforcer!" From what I understand, "spinning the wheel" is a very long, arduous process. It takes a very long time to do and takes quite a bit of effort. The experienced players in my clan recommend that people start a new character if they want to join a new faction, cause it's just too much effort to "spin the wheel."

I've also been playing since I got my free key from this site, and I'm only level 14 (that's after over 100 hours of play.) So I seriously doubt you've made it near Sector 2 yet. All your information on factions is second hand (mine is as well) and I think you're basing your opinions on it from assumptions you've made from talk you heard in the Help channel.

I would say that is a fair assumption.  I think the main reason the OP believes these things to be bad, or to give it the label of "shallow" is simply because its time intensive.  You can't do exactly what you stated above "I wanna be CHOTA today, I want to be Enforcer tomorrow!"  The Gain X1 Lose X2 faction system is created that way for a reason.  If you grind the wheel any-which-way, you will most likely have all factions hate you, and you have to spend the additional time regrinding your desired faction.

That doesn't mean anyone is forcing you to grind the wheel.  Thats a personal choice.

 I also don't really understand the use of the term "shallow" when gaining faction, changing factions, or taking conflict towns.  Everything is relative to your goals.  If you want to grind the wheel, then you obviously know why you are grinding it.  If you know what you want out of your character, then theres no need to do any excess.  The best part of the faction system is that you aren't locked into a faction, so even at level 46 you can decide you want to be chota instead of enforcer, and grind your way in that direction if you so choose.

Getting EVERYTHING in game shouldn't be simple, for those that like to recipe hunt, or AP hunt.  You never have to do a single AP mission if you really don't want to, and you can still make a viable character.  The extra AP points as a whole won't level an entire extra skill to max, so you're only really advancing temporarily faster then everyone else.

Of course, everyone is allowed their opinions, I don't think a lot of the cons really equated to being "good" or "bad" or "shallow" or "ugly"... I just feel they are different and purposely made to discourage people from being able to get everything easily.

 Oh wow, listen to that,  You can play the game completely solo, but there will be content you won't be able to see going solo.  Interesting.  I guess that rules out that ALL content is solo-able.  Very nice.

Originally posted by arcanist

this game is so themepark it makes me want to puke. why does cant everyone be a force user that has the choices to take on these rolls. even switch sides. if you wanted to be a republic whatever with force abilities you should be able to switch to sith inquisitor if you want.

a major theme in starwars is switching sides. falling from the light mainly, but also switching back again. why not in this game.

and whats with the obsession with story. I hate it when a game force syou to do quests. that was the worst thing about the other games. they would have been awsome if every feature was unolocked from the start. the forced missions broke the entire game for me.

i hate that bioware is the company that makes the new starwars mmo.

whats your ideas about this.

This game isn't for you, obviously. This is how they wanted to make the game... if you don't like their vision you really aren't going to be forced to play it.

/thread

Originally posted by DonnieBrasco

They can be scavenged from "curious debris" nodes, which usually look like either a normal scavenge node (black bags), or a broken office desk.

The first ones to be found are in Kingman, I believe....

DB

This is correct.  A good idea also is to mark the nodes on your map, and come back to them when they respawn.. oftentimes you can get a number of the books you need from a single node. Any duplicates, throw on the auction house for chump change, and they should sell quickly, or trade them in your clan to others that need.  You can also pick up paper from curious debris.

Originally posted by WSIMike

Originally posted by maskedweasel

Originally posted by Isturi

 

IF F2P did not equal crap anymore then how come more ppl don't play them? When you here stories bout no lifers spending uber cash on cash shops so they can be uber powerful so they can gank and grief lowbies who want to play a F2P just to play I would say that spells crap.

 <snip>

 

 

I'm not a fan of cash shops.  In fact, if you check my post history, you'll know I'm strictly against them in most cases.  F2P games I usually stay away from with a 60 foot dinosaur,  but I'll be the first to say that DDO unlimited, Allods, and The Chronicles of Spellborn are some very strongly coded and entertaining free to play games.  They are worth the play even if you never spend a dime on them,  and though you may get bored after the first month or two,  they are really more than I expected to find from F2P games.

Of the three games you listed, only 1 of them was designed with the intention of being F2P, and that's Allods.

DDO was designed as, and remained, a P2P MMO up until Turbine switched to F2P because it wasn't doing well enough with subscriptions. (Others and myself have already pointed that out in other threads... won't rehash it here).

Spellborn was, to my knowledge, not decided to be a F2P/Microtransaction MMO 'til late in its development after it was picked up by Acclaim.

Allods is the only game in that list that has been F2P all along, and is a rather tragic one to use. It's a game that is better known among F2P right now for all the wrong reasons. Specifically, having exposed in a big way the true greed that belies the whole "Free To Play!" setup F2P's shovel out with their advertising.

They did so by setting item shop prices that were beyond obnoxious. Even some of the most stalwart defenders of Item Shops said "uh... what?". People called them out on it, and only after the backlash, did they say, basically, "Oh, oops! (damn we hoped no one would notice). Oh, fine, we'll lower the prices... There, see? We did it. Will you play our game now? It's Free!!" (no, that's not a direct quote... just a sarcastic summary of what pretty much went down).

 

Don't get me wrong, I understand that (and you are correct when you say) that TCOS was originally NOT intended to be a F2P game.  I was in Beta, and as usual the payment model wasn't decided on for a while. DDO of course wasn't F2P at launch.  Needless to say as far as development progressed they ended up going F2P, and to me, thats a good thing for the F2P market.  If free to play games with triple A quality exists, perhaps it will edge out all the other weak free to play games that just mash together games with a keyboard and a spoon and expect us to give them money.

Three years ago, F2P had no lasting appeal for me personally, but the turnaround on it in such a short time, where now I have three games I feel are worthy of anyones time (be it they were originally developed for this payment model or not) speaks a lot for me.  I still won't give these games my money, but I will consider giving them my time... so I guess thats something.